front page - editorial archives  - search - community

Class Notes
	Taking a look behind the curtain of Affirmative Action (Published February 10, 2003) By H. WELLS WULSIN

Within the coming months, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear two cases against the University of Michigan's race-based admissions policy. The plaintiffs (two applicants to the undergraduate college and to the law school) argue that because Michigan gives preferences to minority applicants, their admissions system unlawfully discriminates based on race.

In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Bakke v. University of California Board of Regents that race may be used as a factor in admitting candidates to a university, but that strict racial quotas are unconstitutional. The University of Michigan adheres to the Bakke ruling by not fixing the percentages of each race to be admitted, but the Supreme Court may do away with racial preferences entirely.

Affirmative Action at the University of Michigan is designed to counteract the lack of minorities entering the university. If fewer minorities enter the higher-education pipeline, then fewer will be trained for professional careers (law, medicine, education, etc.) vital to society. Under-representation of minorities also creates a more homogenized campus community - where multiple ethnic perspectives lose their voice, and the few minorities present may feel alienated. If the ideal university community consists of both computer whizzes and rugby jocks, both violin prodigies and electric guitar rockers, both radical activists and tweed jacket conservatives, then a healthy college campus should also include students from many cultural backgrounds. Admissions preferences should foster that ethnic diversity.

Lately, this pending case has put Affirmative Action on the front pages of newspapers and magazines, but it has long been a hot topic for debate. Social studies teachers and debate coaches love to use Affirmative Action for discussion, because it brings into conflict two great ideological pillars held dear by our nation - diversity and equality. Unfortunately, Affirmative Action can give us only temporary diversity, not the enduring diversity we would like to see persist. And the lack of Affirmative Action will give equality at one stage without fixing a deeper systemic unfairness.

Indeed, the Affirmative Action debate is flawed from the start because it fails to address the antecedent causes of minority under-representation. The media rarely question this deeper problem of why minorities would be accepted at lower rates without the aid of Affirmative Action. The answer is as insightful as it is obvious: the schools that poor and minority children attend do not provide the same quality of education found at schools for wealthier, whiter student populations.

To obtain equality throughout our society (not just in the ivory tower), we need to do more than just give a hand up to a few minority students applying to college. A level playing field cannot be created in the senior year of high school. It must start before kindergarten and continue every single year of primary and secondary school. If we ensure equal provision of quality education to all students, then Affirmative Action will become unnecessary, a relic from a time when a child's education varied widely based on the wealth and status of his parents.

At an all-black public high school like mine, one might expect Affirmative Action to loom large in the minds of teachers and students. But the upcoming Supreme Court case hardly makes a blip on the radar screen here, since Affirmative Action policies affect only a select few. Just five of our 250 seniors have beaten the national average on the SAT (1000). Affirmative Action may help those in the top 2 percent, but for the rest, it is too little, too late. They will have to settle for less competitive colleges or skip higher education altogether.

I do support Affirmative Action to increase minority representation on college campuses, but the far greater issue - the far greater crime - is that children of color and of low-income households are not receiving a decent education at the primary and secondary level. The Affirmative Action decoy diverts our attention from the real equity disparity plaguing our educational system, which is in our public grade schools. Instead of debating college admissions policies, we ought to devote our resources to ensure that every child grows up going to good schools that provide the skills to flourish in any environment. We need excellent schools in our own neighborhood, but we also need them in every other neighborhood across our nation.

The real breach of constitutionality and justice in Michigan occurred long before seniors applied to college. It happened when poor and minority children were denied a decent education at the primary and secondary level. If America really wants a society of diversity and equality in the place where it matters most, then we must not only help the minorities in the talented tenth, but also make sure the other 90 percent attend the high-quality schools they deserve.

***